Funding is key factor
.jpg?w=728)
By Kim Ji-myung
The Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) of the U.S. Defense Department appears first when we search out the history of the Internet. It was in 1963 that the agency began research to build a reliable communication network that would function normally even in an emergency situation.
The next milestone came in 1981 when the word hypertext was invented. Ted Nelson used the term in his presentation “Literary Machine’’ to explain the system Xanadu, which linked information nodes within a document for the first time.
Then in 1989 the now-famous Tim Berners-Lee proposed a historic hypertext project for a global information service. The project could not proceed without the help of network expert Robert Cailliau. Numerous nodes of information came to be hyper-linked, and now people can browse the web, searching and accessing whatever information they want anywhere, anytime, online. The world has changed from the Before the Internet Era (BIE) to the Internet Era (IE), to coin these terms.
Why do I suddenly look back at the history of the Internet now? Analyzing the answers of two surveys (refer to my column: https://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www /news/opinon/2015/11/355_189330.html), I expected to find a notable shift from analog means to digital channels such as the Internet between 2011 and 2015.
But against my expectation, Korean studies scholars continue to acquire information and materials on Korea largely the same way. Maybe the Internet had become part of everyday life already in 2011.
Primary information sources and channels they depend on following the Internet were, in the order of importance, libraries and other memorial institutions in Korea (on visits here), colleagues and friends, mass media, local libraries and books.
Korea’s Internet presence has significantly strengthened, especially among youngsters. K-pop singers and Korean TV dramas are the locomotives in this enhancement, in addition to the prominent success of Samsung, LG and other major firms.
Prof. Don Baker, a long-time Korea watcher, commented, “When I first went to Korea in 1971, Korea was seen as poor and under authoritarian rule. That has changed, and now Korea is seen as rich, democratic and culturally sophisticated.” Prof. Edward J. Schultz said Korea has grown from a Third World (developing) to First World (developed) nation and sets amazing standards for all to follow, it is a major exporting nation.
“Why on earth Korea?” was the general reaction when Prof. Sem Vermeersch first visited Korea in 1992. Most people in Western Europe still thought it was a Third World country in Southeast Asia. “In general there is a much better perception of the country and its culture, even though concrete knowledge is still often inadequate,” according to Prof. Vermeersch.
Prof. Erdenesuren Davaasambuu sees Korea as having eased its immigration policy on foreign students’ employment after graduation, based on his experience at the immigration office in Korea.
Prof. Nghiem Thi Thu Huong praised Korea for having succeeded in maintaining tradition, culture and beautiful customs while achieving modern social development in harmony.
Dr. Vialet Amelie cited technology and sports by which Korea is known widely as very competitive.
Most respondents agreed that the image of Korea had changed dramatically for the better over the past decade. “However, among the Chinese and Japanese specialists in the Western world, Korea is often not mentioned (when discussing East Asian culture),” commented Prof. Youngsook Park.
The survey answers did not show only the positive highlights of Korea. “Ordinary Americans have become somewhat less likely to associate the region with the Korean War although North Korea still looms large in the minds of most. Mainstream American media coverage of South Korea is still less favorable than that of Japan, for example,” commented Prof. Eugene Y. Park.
Prof. Detlef Goller said, “I don’t think that the general image has changed in the last few years. In my opinion, it is constant.” He thinks of Korea as a country in permanent upheaval between industrial mining and high-tech products.
Prof. Pavlov Boyko commented that everything has proceeded too quickly.
The common gloomy comments concerning Korea’s relationship with Japan appeared only in the second survey of 2015.
“Ten years ago, the Japan-Korea relationship was advancing smoothly. But I am concerned that the atmosphere is totally different,” commented researcher Kishida Fumitaka. She said in 2011 that Korea’s economic importance was growing.
The lack of or the shortage of quality publications on Korea has been a fundamental and chronic problem. “There are too few excellent academic publications on Korea,” Prof. Youngsook Park pointed out.
Many pointed out that there are not enough materials on Korea in English, and a worse problem is that even those in existence are not properly supplied or circulated.
Asked what would be the most important factor for the development of Korean studies, a majority of the respondents cited funding. Funding to bring young scholars to Korea was recommended by Prof. Don Baker.
“Due to continuous funding cuts in the British academic sector, funding from Korean sources is vital to the continued presence and survival of Korean studies programs in the U.K.,” said Dr. Charlotte Horlyck.
An important but usually neglected point was raised by Prof. Eugene Y. Park. He noted the importance of understanding Korea as recognized by academic administrators such as university presidents, provosts, and deans ― especially those at major research universities.
Funding is the key.
Hopefully, may these comments and suggestions reach the decision-makers for practical reference and implementation.
The writer is the Director of the Korea Heritage Education Institute (K*Heritage). Her email address is heritagekorea21@gmail.com.